Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Sai Nandini Construction

DRT25 Sept 2025OA/1827/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Karnataka Bank Ltd. against defaulting borrowers for a recovery certificate. The court reduced the claimed interest to 8.00% simple interest while directing joint and several recovery.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate for Rs. 50,79,397.57 plus 8.00% simple interest allowed; quantity to be recovered jointly, severally, and personally from Respondent Nos. 2 & 3.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Sai Nandini Construction — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1827/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Bank Ltd., Branch Known as Bengaluru KH Road Branch situated at #50, Ground Floor, Opp. Shanti Nagar BMTC Bus Station, Kengal Hanumanthaiah Road, Bengaluru- 560 027. Bengaluru Urban District, Karnataka, Represented by its Branch Manager, Sri. Udayasankar, S/o Radhakrishnan. Aged about 45 years.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s. Sai Nandini Construction., Prop: Mr. Damodar Reddy.

¶10

Mr. Damodar Reddy N., S/o Mr. Subba Reddy N., Aged about 44 years.

¶11

Mrs. Susheela D., W/o Damodar Reddy N., Aged about 43 years.

¶12

All are addressed at:No. 01, 6^th Main, Ganapathipura, Konanakunte, Bengaluru- 560 062.

...DEFENDANTS

OA 1827/2024

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : Nithin Chandra M Defendants : Exparte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 50,79,397.57 (Rupees Fifty lakh Seventy Nine Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Seven and Paise Fifty Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

The 1^st defendant is a proprietary concern represented by its proprietor, the 2^nd defendant herein. The 3^rd defendant is the Co-borrower.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed the following loans from the applicant bank:-

¶22

Overdraft limit for a sum of Rs. 60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty lakh Only).

¶23

Temporary overdraft (TOD) of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty lakh Only).

¶24

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed the necessary loan documents along with take delivery letter, memorandum of deposit of title deeds and hypothecation agreement.

¶25

OA 1827/2024

¶26

¶27

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶28

The applicant initiated SARFEASI proceedings and sold the mortgaged secured asset and issued the sale certificate. The authorized officer of the bank had appropriated the sale proceeds of Rs. 40,25,000/(Rupees Forty Lakh Twenty Five Thousand Only).

¶29

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶30

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 30.01.2025.

¶31

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-23 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶32

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶33

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶34

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶35

OA 1827/2024

¶36

¶37

as against the defendants?

¶38

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶39

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶40

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA, creation of hypothecation and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶41

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶42

find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶43

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶44

availed for Housing purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 8.00% (simple).

¶45

In the result, OA.No.1827/2024, stands allowed,

¶46

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶47

OA 1827/2024

¶48

¶49

50,79,397.57 (Rupees Fifty lakh Seventy Nine Thousand Three Hundred

¶50

Ninety Seven and Paise Fifty Seven only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & personally against defendants Nos.2 & 3, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendants jointly, severally & personally against defendants

¶51

Nos. 2 & 3 and their assets including the hypothecated assets.

¶52

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶53

applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶54

iii) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

iv) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms

¶56

of this final order.

¶57

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶58

of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure)

¶59

Rules, 1993.

¶60

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 25^th day of September, 2025].

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

OA 1827/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Rajasekhara K S/o Sathyanarayanappa K, Manager, of Applicant

¶67

Bank.

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	True copy of said sanction order bearing Ref. No. CMRS/R950/17734/2018-19/09-08-2018 dtd 09.08.2018
A2	True copy of the take delivery letter dtd 07.01.2019
A3	True copy of the request for overdraft/ cash credit facilities dtd 07.01.2019
A4	True copy of the request for temporary overdraft/ cash credit facilities dtd 10.01.2019
A5	True copy of the request for overdraft/ cash credit facilities dtd 10.01.2019
A6	True copy of the take delivery letter dtd 10.01.2019
A7	True copy of the memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 31.10.2023
A8	True copy of the letter of authority dated 07.01.2019
A9	True copy of the letter of authority dated 10.01.2019
A10	True copy of the hypothecation agreement dated 07.01.2019
A11	True copy of the declaration dtd 07.01.2019 executed by defendant No
A12	True copy of the declaration dtd 07.01.2019 executed by defendant No.
A13	True copy of the consent letter
A14	True copy of the authorization letter 07.01.2019
A15	True copy of the affidavit-cum-undertaking letter 07.01.2019
A16	True copy of the general power of attorney for book debts dated 07.01.2019
A17	True copy of the letter of acknowledgment of debt dated 01.01.2022
A18	True copy of the demand notice dtd 20.08.2019
A19	True copy of the sale certificate dtd 25.03.2022 bearing document No. JAY-1-09684-2021-22, CD No. JAYD1198, registered in the office of the Sub registrar, jayanagara, Bengaluru
A20	True copy of the sale certificate dtd 07.09.2023 bearing document No. BSK-1-08687-2023-24, registered in the

¶70

OA 1827/2024

¶71

¶72

	office of the Sub-registar, Basavanagudi (Banashankari), Bengaluru
A21	True copy of the legal Notice/s dtd 02.01.2024 along with postal receipts and duly served postal acknowledgement/s
A22	True copy of the recall notice dtd 30.04.2024 along with postal acknowledgement cards for having served the legal notice to defendants
A23	Certified true extract of the said statement of account certified as per bankers books of evidence w.r.t overdraft A/c No. 1147000600013001

¶73

Witness Examined for the Defendants: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶74

-Nil -

¶75

-Nil -

¶76

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Sai Nandini Construction

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Sai Nandini Construction

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Sukumar Mohan

State Bank of India versus Rahul

Canara Bank versus Sgr Infratech Solution

Canara Bank versus Santhosh Kumar H M

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus Bairaiah Since Dead by His Lrs and Others

Canara Bank versus Sri. S C Ravikumar Prop of Dodmane Poultry Farm